Date: Wed, 26 Dec 2001 11:03:54 -0800 (PST) From: Brian Behlendorf <brian@hyperreal.org> To: <cjclark@alum.mit.edu> Cc: <stable@FreeBSD.ORG> Subject: Re: make buildkernel fails on behalf of config version Message-ID: <20011226105454.Y92442-100000@localhost> In-Reply-To: <20011225153309.C136@gohan.cjclark.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Tue, 25 Dec 2001, Crist J. Clark wrote: > It is true. Don't run a kernel and world that were not built with > the same set of source code. *shrug* OK. I guess somewhere along the way I picked up that it was possible by design and intent (and thanks to some serious effort) to upgrade from sources and install a new kernel without having to upgrade world. It's never caused me a problem, and I had assumed that kernel API changes relevant to userland were documented in UPDATING since I saw some messages like that there, e.g., 20010814. It's an awfully useful convention, since it takes a lot longer to compile world than the kernel, and if one runs a fairly locked-down site with just a few services exposed, keeping those services updated as well as the kernel is operationally simpler than also keeping world updated. Anyways, it's completely understandable why this wouldn't be true in current, and also understandable why right now as large sets of fixes are being MFC'd and the release is being prepped it wouldn't be true, but in general it'd be awfully nice to have. I do wonder why, if one should never build them separately, they are separate make targets in the upgrade docs? Brian To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-stable" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20011226105454.Y92442-100000>